Progressive Politics from Memphis

Credibility Gap

Look at the second and third headlines I ganked from Yahoo!. Notice anything wrong with that? Yeah, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice…well, you can’t get fooled twice right?

How is it that this Administration believes it has any credibility when it comes to the collection and dissemination of intelligence as a justification for potential military action?

They don’t, but for some reason the “Gang of 500” and other “smart” people in DC seem to think that they still do. Now that there is no question that the DOD and the “Intelligence Community” gamed the system to propell us into a war that was neither justified nor necessary, why does anyone believe that “proof” exists linking the Iranian government to violence in Iraq?

I have no doubt that there are people from Iran working with private militias in Iraq. This is a no brainer considering that SCIRI operated out of Iran during the reign of Saddam Hussein. There has been a long history of Iranian influence in Iraq because the majority of Iraqi’s in the south are Shia, just like the majority of people in Iran…something this Administration didn’t seem to account for, or even recognize as a potential problem. That there are people from Iran fighting in Iraq does not mean that the Iranian government is involved or interfering. People of similar culture and/or religious beliefs, often come to the aid of their brothers in times of need, strife, and war.

It is evident that this Administration thinks that they have the authority to engage Iran as a result of either the 2002 bill that authorized action in Iraq or the lesser cited but more open ended 2001 AUMF.

Engaging Iran is not only foolish, but would further destabilize a region that we have already screwed up royally. Earlier this morning, Senator Jim Webb asked Condoleeza Rice again if it was the Administration’s position that the 2002 Iraq War Resolution could be used as justification for attacking Iran. Ms. Rice hedged.

The real danger here is the 2001 bill not the 2002 bill. Section 2 states:

IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

When the Congress ceeded the power to declare war to the Executive Branch, they not only walked away from their responsibility to check the Executive, but reinforced the notion of the “Unitary Executive” that has supremecy over the other branches. This was an attack on our Constitution and 200 years of equal branches of government.

If Democrats in Congress are really serious about getting out of Iraq, not getting into Iran, and restoring the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, then instead of toothless nonbinding resolutions that will do nothing but embolden the Administration, they need to deauthorize both the 2001 and 2002 military authorization bills, and pass legislation that would serve to only keep a stabilization force in place in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill will likely be vetoed, but it’s the only way that Democrats can prove that not only are they against the war, but they have a plan, and that plan is winning by not pissing away the lives of any more soldiers.